2007 Jeep Wrangler
Calling all Wrangler fans! Post your comments here.
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
If you want to know what the body will look like, take a late model tracker and put the liberty front end on. Heard no more removable doors.
The bumper/winch looked slick, the side mirrors very old school- think 1950's ford/chevy pickup-esque. Doors looked similar, but hard to tell because of the angle.
The headlights were round (at least they learned that lesson), and the foglights were integrated into it a little down and to the outside, so the 2 circles (headlight and foglamp) shared a little common area in the corner. I think car and driver described it as looking "Siamese", but as I am fairly unfamiliar with folks from Siam, that term didnt mean a whole lot to me.
Anywho, that's about all I can remember. I've been trolling this and the regular wrangler board for a while, but because I am as-of-yet jeepless, I havent had anything to post about.
Hopefully one of these days I'll become a more regular poster.
I have seen some sources indicate the Wrangler would use the libby platform, but the most recent articles I have seen have indicated that the Wrangler will remain on its own platform. I cannot remember an exact source at the moment, but I think it was in a Toledo newpaper article regarding the Jeep assembly plant expansions, and new construction. However, I am not sure.
I know a lot of Jeep people fear what DCX will do to the Wrangler, but I also think they realize that the Wrangler represents the Jeep image, and that image is what sells all those IFS Liberty's. However, its hard to speculate what it might have or might not since DCX has been awfully quiet on the whole thing.
Knowing what the Wrangler means to the brands image, I do not expect they will screw around with it a whole lot. They need it to comply with increasingly tighter safety standards which could end the ability to offer removeable doors. Thank the government, not Jeep for that. However, they still have a couple years to engineer a solution to it. IFS vs Axle is a big debate, and I wouldn't be surprised to see an IFS. Maybe the solution could be having an IFS installed on a subframe for the bulk of Wranglers that are bought for daily driving and do not venture far off road (ala the Mustang Cobra IRS), and a solid axle option for the off roaders.
The 4.0L is going to die. Its an old engine that really is getting a little long in the tooth. I do not think the Libby 3.7L is a good solution, but maybe they will make improvements to that motor or come out with another. I heard rumors that DCX is looking at making a 6 cylinder version of their V8 hemi. That might be a better solution than the 3.7L.
Most everything up to this point is still speculation. So don't panic yet, and be sure to tell DCX what you want to see, or don't want to see in the new Wrangler. They do listen!
Is there some reason they don't just lob off two cylinders, maybe that don't work for a Hemi engine, hopefully they put an MDS system in any other engine they put in any Jeep, even if it's a 4 cylinder diesel engine.
I don't see the difference between IFS and Solid Axle except Solid Axles are older and seem better suited for the Wrangler because it's simpler, other than that I could care less, the Liberty and Grand Cherokee are great off road and both have IFS.
IFS or SRA?
What features make a Jeep a Jeep? Let's hope DC is reading this and takes serious note.
As we all know, 90 degree V6 engines usually require a counter-rotating balance shaft to run smoothly, and even then have a hard time running like a good 60 degree motor or an inline six.
How about this - DC should develop a 60 degree 4.0 liter SOHC 3 valve per cylinder V6 that could be used as power for the Durango, Dakota and all Jeep models. Tune it for low end torque and output figures of 235hp and 255 lb-ft of torque would not be out of the question and definitely an improvement over any current offering. AND, it would likely be silky smooth.
'94 Pajero 2.8TD, '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c, '21 WRX, '20 S90 T6, '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel, '97 Suzuki R Wagon, '92 325i, '97 Alto Works, '96 Opel Astra, TWO 4wd '97 Pajero Minis (1 turbo auto and 1 N/A manual); Wagoneer L on order; and in queue for Lucid Air Pure, Blazer EV, and Fisker Ocean.
It seems like just the NAV system an offroader would be looking for.
Have you seen this in a Wrangler?
Just asking, because I've seen the Nav system on Ebay for around $900 but wanted to make sure it worked in a wrangler. I know some other aftermarket NAV systems require a connection to some type of Speed sensor, which I guess they use in conjunction to GPS?
Thanks in advance for any help
As for the Hemi, I have yet to see anything from Chrysler that proves its multiple displacement technology is fail-safe. I understand that, at cruising speeds, a pin is used to deactivate the valves on 4 of the 8 cylinders. I would like to know what happens if that pin wears out or breaks or gets stuck somehow. Come on DC, prove that it is fail safe. I also note that the AMG versions of certain Mercedes cars never adopted this technology although it appeared on other Mercedes models.
I know this isn't exactly a timely reply, but this is my first visit to this discussion and I just read your post.
Man, I can't believe you said that you can't see the difference between IFS and solid axle! There is all the difference in the world in articulation. IFS is terrible for off roading compared to solid axle!
A Wrangler will go places a vehicle with IFS can only dream about!
Also, unless they have changed them, and they very well might have, the Grands have solid front axles. Have they changed them to IFS?
If I wanted to spend more time looking, I could probably find even better pictures to show the flex that I get with my Wrangler. This one below will have to do for now. Think you could get that kind of flex out of IFS? NO WAY! A vehicle with IFS is going to be nose down and leaned over to the right in that situation, or, it would be nose high and leaned to the left. In other words, the weight of the vehicle would all be on the right rear and left front tires.
Have you hugged your Jeep today?
However the front suspension may turn out, at least it has been confirmed that it will be body on frame... I seriously believe solid axles will live on in the 2007 Wrangler.
As for the RB1, several people have been installing this system in their 2003-5 Wranglers already, with zero problems.
Have you hugged your Jeep today?
The pix of the Wrangler does not have a stock suspension. No stock Wrangler will have the kind of articulation shown here.
I'm beginning to think that the Wrangler will be released for the 2007 model year, since we have no sort of information or pictures, with the exception of a Photoshopped Jeep Rescue. If it was a 2006, we would have more information, and have seen some sort of drawing or prototype by now.
But the point was that the solid axle COULD do that. Could a modified IFS setup give the articulation that a modified solid axle does?
When you start getting into purpose-built or modified suspensions, be it solid axle or IFS/IRS, it becomes a slippery slope. Pun intended:)
No, most independent set ups don't have that kind of articulation potential. On the flip side, as important as articulation is, many of the newer high-tech 4WD setups will get you moving (or un-stuck) with traction just going to one wheel. So today, depending on what you're driving, enormous articulation isn't as important as it was say 5 years ago when these new trick 4WD systems weren't available. BTW, I have seen some pretty trick IFS/IRS off-road set-ups, with gobs of suspension travel, but they're purpose-built units.
At the end of the day, what's important is that you got to your destination. If massive articulation is the answer, then great. If a trick 4WD system (with relatively poor articulation) gets you there, then that's fine too.
Seats - I love the seats in the older Wranglers (like they had in '98) - very comfortable. The new ones are still comfortable but don't fit me as well. Even the new ones are more comfortable than many of the other cars I've test driven (or rented), so I hope they don't change them very much. About the only thing I might like to have with the interior is heated seats. That sure would be nice on cold mornings.
I think I saw the factory system demonstrated at Camp Jeep this summer. They said that it could be installed in the '03 and later Wranglers (the start year could have been earlier than that but it wasn't an option for a '98). While it had some nice features, I wasn't impressed with the map database - it didn't even have my "town" much less my street (it only had the next town over from mine). I lost interest in it after that, so I never asked if you could hook it into a computer and upload/download other map databases to it, or other people's computed off-road routes.
As far as suspension systems go - the Army seems to be pretty happy with the military hummer, and that's independent suspension. I'll reserve judgement on this issue until I see what comes out. I'd like to see more use of selectable lockers and the idea of a factory installed winch is neat.
I agree 100%. DC seems to have forgotten what makes a Jeep a Jeep. IFS, compared with solid axel, is a very stupid setup for any serious 4x4. Of course most socker moms and dads know nothing about the real differences between the two.
I may also plan to buy a Wrangler before they are trashed into Mall goers.
Also, no offense, but there's no such thing as "IFS all around".
You saw the Gladiator. There goes your Wrangler...almost. Use your imagination to figure out the real thing. What's wrong with better safety ratings? Your US Gov't is requiring it, so ... no blaming DCX for that one.
I'm not that crazy about the Gladiator, but I'm also willing to wait and see what they actually put out there.
I really don't think the Wrangler will change much. The look of the Wrangler is just Jeep. If I mention my Cherokee as just "my jeep" and the person doesn't know what I drive, they automatically assume it's a CJ or Wrangler.
The Wrangler is just to cool to change MUCH. It's a serious off road vehicle, it is a convertible, the doors come off, it is unisex(men and women can drive and not look out of place no matter how high off the ground it is), and they are just cool as hell.
I really don't want to see a V6 under the hood of the Wrangler. I think the 4.0 does way better in most situations than the 3.7. Besides you can stroke the 4.0 and get awesome power out of it. Hey Jeep should just stroke the 4.0 from the factory!!! Maybe make it more economical somehow maybe lighter, put an aluminum head on it or something like that. Yeah that would be sweet! Also the CRD Diesel would be awesome. Don't even offer a gas 4 cylinder anymore.
We can dream, can't we?
DCX is usually secretive until about a year before introduction, I used to see them drive around the Chrysler 300 and Dodge Magnum over at Palm Springs in California almost a year before introduction and they were not hiding. We are a little over a year away, so it is close enough , but they are still evasive, that means whatever it is, is not a pre- production version yet. The Magnums I saw were full pre-production back then.
the TJ, still has a 4 cyl availible in Canada. as for the I-6, it desperately needs to be replaced. It is at least 25 years old. the V6 would be better for fuel economy while providing almost the same power.
If you want reall fun, go for the Turbo diesel if the make it in the Wrangler/TJ. 295 lbs/ft of torque. Slap on the 4wd and squeel all 4 tires at once!!!
Just what I heard.